Red dots = gun murders. DC does not allow guns.
Red dots = gun murders. DC does not allow guns.
I bet if they make a chart since the gun ban was restricted you would see a lot less red dots
15 more years! 15 more years!
The guns, they get on buses, they get on trains, they hitchhike..from Ohio, from Pennsylvania, from Kentucky..and they secretly enter DC and put themselves into the hands of innocent bad guys, and make the badguys shoot innocent people.
Duh, don't you understand? The Bradys have been telling us this for years!! The guns find ways into gun free zones! They must be stopped!!
Duh, don't you understand? The Bradys have been telling us this for years!! The guns find ways into gun free zones! They must be stopped!!
No.
you from dc? word. thats a rough city.
The problem is that once the guns are out there, bans are ineffective. If you stop the guns before they become readily available, then less guns = less gun violence. For example, in Melbourne we haven't had a shooting for ages (except with the "underworld" murders).
Then you would be wrong, I am afraid.Mitch wrote:
I bet if they make a chart since the gun ban was restricted you would see a lot less red dots
Eh, it's actually somewhat decent in Northwest DC. Southwest too, I guess, because there isn't much thereclogar wrote:
you from dc? word. thats a rough city.
Southeast is the worst part though. I don't like going there
Why would you think this?imortal wrote:
Then you would be wrong, I am afraid.Mitch wrote:
I bet if they make a chart since the gun ban was restricted you would see a lot less red dots
15 more years! 15 more years!
my quote was a dave chappelle quote but i guess it was a question lolHurricaИe wrote:
Eh, it's actually somewhat decent in Northwest DC. Southwest too, I guess, because there isn't much thereclogar wrote:
you from dc? word. thats a rough city.
Southeast is the worst part though. I don't like going there
Well, DC does get a lot of visitors...mostly senators.
By the time SkyNet became self-aware it had spread into millions of gun manufacturers across the planet. Ordinary pea-shooters in office desks, dorm rooms; everywhere. It was in primer; in nitrate. There was no safety mechanism; it could not be dismantled. The attack began in 1993, just as she said it would. Judgment Day, the day the human race was almost destroyed by the firearms they'd built to protect themselves. I should have realized it was never our destiny to stop Judgment Day, it was merely to survive it, together. The Remington knew; she tried to tell us, but I didn't want to hear it. Maybe the future has been written. I don't know; all i know is what the Remington taught me; never stop shooting. And I never will. The firefight has just begun.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2008-03-08 00:03:40)
k.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
By the time SkyNet became self-aware it had spread into millions of gun manufacturers across the planet. Ordinary pea-shooters in office desks, dorm rooms; everywhere. It was in primer; in nitrate. There was no safety mechanism; it could not be dismantled. The attack began in 1993, just as she said it would. Judgment Day, the day the human race was almost destroyed by the firearms they'd built to protect themselves. I should have realized it was never our destiny to stop Judgment Day, it was merely to survive it, together. The Remington knew; she tried to tell us, but I didn't want to hear it. Maybe the future has been written. I don't know; all i know is what the Remington taught me; never stop shooting. And I never will. The firefight has just begun.
Nature is a powerful force. Those who seek to subdue nature, never do so permanently.
In 1997-1998 ( if memory serves) Australia had a terrible mass shooting in Tasmania. ( Around 30 people killed I think) . Since then we have faced a ban on concealable weapons/pistols, automatic rifles, semi automatic rifles, pump action shotties, and much stricter regs on gun ownership ( gun safes, cooling off periods etc). It worked here, gun crime is way down ( although it does happen in isolated cases). So in Australia gun bans did prevent gun crime.
The thing is I dont think it would work in the US as there are too many guns in the system already. Combined that with the fact that its in your Constitution I cant see bans being effective over there. The US doesnt want to get rid of their guns so, I dont think gun bans would work over thre.
The thing is I dont think it would work in the US as there are too many guns in the system already. Combined that with the fact that its in your Constitution I cant see bans being effective over there. The US doesnt want to get rid of their guns so, I dont think gun bans would work over thre.
uh, yes????? isnt it obvious????
In those cases, the entire country enacted the restrictions. It is much easier to control the shipment of guns across a national border. Not to mention Australia and Taz are bloody islands.Burwhale the Avenger wrote:
In 1997-1998 ( if memory serves) Australia had a terrible mass shooting in Tasmania. ( Around 30 people killed I think) . Since then we have faced a ban on concealable weapons/pistols, automatic rifles, semi automatic rifles, pump action shotties, and much stricter regs on gun ownership ( gun safes, cooling off periods etc). It worked here, gun crime is way down ( although it does happen in isolated cases). So in Australia gun bans did prevent gun crime.
The thing is I dont think it would work in the US as there are too many guns in the system already. Combined that with the fact that its in your Constitution I cant see bans being effective over there. The US doesnt want to get rid of their guns so, I dont think gun bans would work over thre.
When each state has a different set of gun regs and a complete lack of any cross-border enforcement, gun restricted areas only restrict the legal people who want guns.
Case in point: A friend of mine legally owns a glock 17, beretta m9, and a .308. He wanted to add a .50 rifle to the collection. Good luck getting that in California, so he hoped the state line to Arizona, the land of everything, and drove on back with a new toy. It doesn't really limits the number of guns, only how you get them, which is pretty much useless.
And how many real criminals buy their guns at gun stores anyway?
In America nothing can stop gun crime because there is just too many illegal guns floating around. Its true what they say about gun control "criminals will still have illegal guns". But its not like that everywhere. In Austria seasoned criminals rob banks with knives and baseball bats because they CANT get their hands on a illegal firearm. Its just not that easy.
This is the thing that creates a lot of confusion in debates here on bf2s. Many Americans think that its stupid that not all Police Officers (in some EU countries) carry guns, because they think all criminals can go out on the first corner and buy a gun. On the other hand many Europeans think that you can just make new tougher gun control laws in America and solve the problem. What they don't get is that America is flooded with illegal firearms and its much easier for criminals to get guns.
This is the thing that creates a lot of confusion in debates here on bf2s. Many Americans think that its stupid that not all Police Officers (in some EU countries) carry guns, because they think all criminals can go out on the first corner and buy a gun. On the other hand many Europeans think that you can just make new tougher gun control laws in America and solve the problem. What they don't get is that America is flooded with illegal firearms and its much easier for criminals to get guns.
Wrong, actually... The ban went into effect in 1976.Mitch wrote:
I bet if they make a chart since the gun ban was restricted you would see a lot less red dots
Homicides continued to increase until their peak in 1991. 15 years later.
It then declined over the next 14 years until 2005 where it hit it's low.
In 2006 it started going back up, and in fact, a crime emergency was declared when it shot up to an average of more than one per day within a month's time.
No kidding. I had to drive through SE/Anacostia yesterday. Thank God it was daylight.HurricaИe wrote:
Eh, it's actually somewhat decent in Northwest DC. Southwest too, I guess, because there isn't much thereclogar wrote:
you from dc? word. thats a rough city.
Southeast is the worst part though. I don't like going there
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
We've had multiple days where the entire police force of DC is on the streets...and people are still getting capped. If you look at places where there are no gun bans, the rate of homicide using a handgun is much lower. It's almost as if gun bans are a completely independent variable.HITNRUNXX wrote:
Wrong, actually... The ban went into effect in 1976.Mitch wrote:
I bet if they make a chart since the gun ban was restricted you would see a lot less red dots
Homicides continued to increase until their peak in 1991. 15 years later.
It then declined over the next 14 years until 2005 where it hit it's low.
In 2006 it started going back up, and in fact, a crime emergency was declared when it shot up to an average of more than one per day within a month's time.
IMO, other aspects of DC drive all the violent crime here...most of them being related to DC's liberal immigration and welfare positions.
Last edited by FEOS (2008-03-08 04:13:30)
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
"Still think gun bans prevent crime?"
Yes.
Yes.
"Guns are to blame for crime, as much as spoons are to blame for Rosie O'Donnells weight".....
It went something like that
It went something like that
so your friend decided to break the law and commit a crime.Protecus wrote:
Case in point: A friend of mine legally owns a glock 17, beretta m9, and a .308. He wanted to add a .50 rifle to the collection. Good luck getting that in California, so he hoped the state line to Arizona, the land of everything, and drove on back with a new toy. It doesn't really limits the number of guns, only how you get them, which is pretty much useless.
And how many real criminals buy their guns at gun stores anyway?
and a beretta M9 is a military version of the civilian hand gun. was it a 92?
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-03-08 05:51:19)
Innit.jord wrote:
"Still think gun bans prevent crime?"
Yes.
Although in a country like America where nearly everyone (even ig ) has a gun, it would be stupid to introduce gun bans across the whole country. Whereas in a country like the UK seeing as most people don't have guns it seems to make more sense to just ban guns in an attempt to reduce gun crime.
Of course at the end of the day if someone is determined enough they can do anything
I have a gun